The offer for Tamil superstar Rajinikanth to portray the 18th‑century ruler Tipu Sultan in a film titled “Tiger of Mysore” has sparked renewed debate. Members of the Bharatiya Janata Party and certain Hindutva groups have urged the actor to decline the role, citing allegations that Tipu was a tyrant who killed thousands of Hindus who resisted conversion to Islam.
Tipu’s name has long been a flashpoint in Indian public life. Earlier, a television serial based on Bhagwan S. Gidwani’s book “The Sword of Tipu Sultan” and a 2014 proposal by the Congress government to celebrate his birth anniversary drew criticism. A university named after him was also rejected. These controversies highlight the divergent ways historians and political groups have portrayed Tipu.
Historians have offered conflicting assessments. Colonial accounts label him a religious bigot, accusing him of persecuting Nayars, Catholics, and Coorgis. Kannada nationalist writers depict him as anti‑Kannadiga for altering place names and introducing Persian terms. Marxist scholars, however, view him as an early freedom fighter and a pioneer of productive forces. The writer argues that Tipu cannot be reduced to a single narrative, noting his Sufi background and his blend of secular, anti‑colonial, and internationalist ideals.
Tipu’s reforms reflected a mix of radical and inclusive measures. He banned alcohol on moral grounds, introduced rocket technology, promoted sericulture, confiscated upper‑caste property for redistribution, and laid plans for a dam on the Cauvery. His patronage extended to 156 temples, the construction of a church in Mysuru, and support for religious institutions such as the Sringeri Mutt. Historian B. A. Saletore has described him as a defender of Hindu Dharma. The writer concludes that political exigencies, rather than communal ideology, underpinned his actions, and that Tipu’s legacy continues to shape contemporary political discourse.
